FYI, Chromium folks on Windows will be on python 2.6 real soon(tm).
The CL to bug them to upgrade should be committed within the next few
minutes.
[Thread hijack]
If you're not a Chromium-Webkit committer running on Windows, please
ignore the rest of this email.
Otherwise, please "del depot_tools\python.bat" and run "gclient".
Thanks,
M-A
2010/3/19 Adam Barth <abarth at webkit.org>:
> Awesome!
>> /me goes and comments on the bug.
>> Adam
>>> On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 9:57 AM, Chris Jerdonek <cjerdonek at webkit.org> wrote:
>> Mechanize (and ClientForm on which it depends) does work with Python 2.4:
>>>>http://wwwsearch.sourceforge.net/mechanize/>>>> (See the section on compatibility.)
>>>>>> On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 9:19 AM, Adam Barth <abarth at webkit.org> wrote:
>>> My understanding is that some of the libraries we use, like Mechanize,
>>> don't work in Python 2.4. My complaint in Bug 36063 is that we're
>>> re-implementing Mechanize poorly. I'd rather we just upgraded the
>>> machines that need to run-webkit-tests to a more modern version of
>>> Python.
>>>>>> Adam
>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 7:41 AM, Chris Jerdonek <cjerdonek at webkit.org> wrote:
>>>> No one responded back with a summary of the Python 2.4 discussion, so
>>>> I'll attempt a summary of my own after reading--
>>>>>>>>https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=35584>>>>>>>> (If you recall, we are trying to decide what Python code we write
>>>> needs to work with Python 2.4.)
>>>>>>>> The Chromium project still uses Python 2.4 in a significant way. Some
>>>> Chromium bots run new-run-webkit-tests using 2.4, and a number of
>>>> developers use 2.4 in their development environments. Generally
>>>> speaking, people support upgrading, but no one is spearheading an
>>>> upgrade and there is no ETA.
>>>>>>>> For the time being, because of the bots, it seems like
>>>> new-run-webkit-tests definitely needs to keep working with 2.4. But
>>>> for the tools used more in the development environment (webkit-patch,
>>>> etc), it seems like people would be willing to find a way to make
>>>> things work with 2.5+.
>>>>>>>> It would be pretty easy to get all of our Python code working with 2.4
>>>> (we had a patch for this a couple weeks ago), but going back wouldn't
>>>> let us use some of the nicer constructs. And we would have to contend
>>>> with at least one bug in 2.4.
>>>>>>>> (End of summary.)
>>>>>>>> Plainly, the options seem to be--
>>>>>>>> (1) All Python 2.5+
>>>> (2) All Python 2.4
>>>> (3) Some combination of (1) and (2) (e.g. new-run-webkit-tests 2.4,
>>>> everything else 2.5)
>>>>>>>> However, (1) does not seem to be an option. Personally, I'm starting
>>>> to lean more toward to (2). One reason is that we are already
>>>> starting to see a case of re-implementing in Python 2.4 (for
>>>> new-run-webkit-tests) code that was already written in 2.5:
>>>>>>>>https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=36063#c4>>>>>>>> I also think it would be helpful if we did not need to have this
>>>> discussion for each new script we decide to write in Python. I would
>>>> be willing to update the patch from a couple weeks ago that adjusts
>>>> things for 2.4.
>>>>>>>> --Chris
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 4:18 PM, Chris Jerdonek <cjerdonek at webkit.org> wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 6:43 PM, David Kilzer <ddkilzer at webkit.org> wrote:
>>>>>> On Thu, March 4, 2010 at 5:35:08 PM, William Siegrist wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Since I have a Tiger machine handy, I tested this and was able to build python
>>>>>>> 2.5.5 from MacPorts on a PowerPC. It takes a while, but it worked. I did not try
>>>>>>> python 2.6.
>>>>>>>>>>>> I've installed python 2.6.4 using MacPorts on my PowerBook G4 running Tiger 10.4.11, and it's worked find with webkit-patch the one or two times I tried it.
>>>>>>>>>> That sounds great. Thanks a lot, Dave and Bill. So does it seem safe
>>>>> to say, then, that folks on 2.3 can upgrade if it ever becomes
>>>>> necessary to use one of the tools?
>>>>>>>>>> As for Python 2.4, I haven't been following the discussion as closely
>>>>> since it seems to affect Chromium developers more. Can someone
>>>>> summarize the state of the discussion there -- does it seem like there
>>>>> is a consensus?
>>>>>>>>>> --Chris
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> webkit-dev mailing list
>>>>webkit-dev at lists.webkit.org>>>>http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
> webkit-dev mailing list
>webkit-dev at lists.webkit.org>http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev>